“Gatwick Obviously NOT” given permission to take their JR of the CAA to the Appeal Court

Date added: January 5, 2016

The group, “Gatwick Obviously NOT” (GON) has received the welcome news that their appeal to be allowed to make a Judicial Review (JR) against the CAA has been successful. They have now won Permission to go to a Full Hearing in the Appeal Court. In March 2015, Martin Baraud, the Chair of GON, served a JR upon the CAA, with Gatwick Airport Ltd and the Secretary of State for Transport as an ‘Interested Party’. The “Ground of Claim” is that there has indeed been a change in the use of airspace and that the CAA should first have consulted on such change before it was put into effect by GAL and NATS. In August, they were refused permission to proceed with the JR. Taking advice from their QC, John Steel, they appealed. GON say the judge, Mr Justice Haddon-Cave, while refusing the Permission, added a postscript, seeming to suggest that there may be an issue about the need for consultation for ‘seismic’ events (such as the flight path changes introduced without notice) that is more a matter for the law-makers, not the lawyers. Now GON are pleased that the Judge The Rt. Hon. Lord Justice Burnett has stated that the case – very significantly – must be held in the Appeal Court rather than the High Court. This is in order to “‘obtain an authoritative ruling on the meaning of relevant provisions, which govern similar arrangements at airports other than Gatwick”.
.Tweet

Gatwick Obviously NOT said:

5.1.2016

We are pleased to announce that ‘Gatwick Obviously Not’ has won Permission to go to a Full Hearing in the Appeal Court for our Judicial Review.

It is called: ‘Barraud v CAA & Others’

We would like to add that the Judge The Rt. Hon. Lord Justice Burnett has stated that it must be held in the Appeal Court rather than the High Court to:

‘obtain an authoritative ruling on the meaning of relevant provisions, which govern similar arrangements at airports other than Gatwick’

This is hugely significant and vindicates the arguments made before the High Court Judge that this clearly is a seriously arguable case.

We would like to at this point pay tribute to our superb legal team led by John Steel QC.

The legal team say this vindicates the arguments made before the High Court Judge that this clearly is a seriously arguable case.

While we have won nothing yet in terms of a final decision, this is the right moment to give our thanks to two groups of people: the legal team and our donors.

Our Barristers – John Steel QC and James Potts of 39 Essex Chambers, and our solicitor, Chad Sutton of Maples Teesdale – deserve enormous credit for guiding us to this very significant moment; they could not have been more engaged, professional or focussed in helping us try to secure justice for us all.

Our donors – members of the public who are experiencing the increased aircraft noise – have been equally magnificent. In that dramatic first week back in February we received pledges of over £100,000 from those living in the villages to the west of Tunbridge Wells.

We followed this by launching our Crowd Funding site at the giant message in the field day in the summer of 2015. Link

For the JR, the “Ground of Claim” is that there has indeed been a change in the use of airspace and that the CAA should first have consulted on such change before it was put into effect by GAL and NATS. To date no consultation has taken place and this whole procedure has been bypassed. GON wants proper consultation, and that a full airspace change process is carried out.

Gatwick Obviously NOT, the flight path group set up last year in response to the newly concentrated arrival flight paths to Gatwick, has been refused permission to proceed with their JR against the CAA. Though disappointed, the GON’s Strategic Team of 15 spent much of the weekend conferring on the best way forward. They had to review and understand the reasons for the Order to Refuse and take the advice of their QC, John Steel. Having done so, the very strong consensus was to go to Appeal, and Counsel has been instructed. It is expected that this will we have now given those instructions to our Counsel. We expect that this will happen in the autumn. It is, however, a daunting task to take on the CAA, the Secretary of State for Transport, Gatwick airport and NATS. The decision to go for Appeal was taken with great care – and fundraising is under way to raise the necessary funds. GON say the judge, Mr Justice Haddon-Cave, while refusing the Permission, added a postscript, seeming to suggest that there may be an issue about the need for consultation for ‘seismic’ events (such as the flight path changes introduced without notice) that is more a matter for the law-makers, not the lawyers.

“Gatwick Obviously NOT” serves Judicial Review upon the CAA, on airspace change, with Gatwick Airport as an “Interested Party”

March 10, 2015

The relatively new campaign, “Gatwick Obviously NOT”, (GON) which was set up in response to changes to flight paths to the east of Gatwick airport during summer 2014, has served a Judicial Review upon the CAA, with Gatwick Airport Limited and the Secretary of State for Transport listed under the CAA as an ‘Interested Party’. The claim is being brought by Martin Baraud, the Chair of GON. The “Ground of Claim” is that there has indeed been a change in the use of airspace and that the CAA should first have consulted on such change before it was put into effect by GAL and NATS. To date no consultation has taken place and this whole procedure has been bypassed. GON wants proper consultation, and that a full airspace change process is carried out. They also want there to be no airspace changes by the CAA without approval by the Secretary of State. GON has already succeeded in raising over £100,000 and they will be fundraising further, for more legal costs.